• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

PoliGAF Thread of PRESIDENT OBAMA Checkin' Off His List

Status
Not open for further replies.

mckmas8808

Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
Godslay said:
I honestly don't know what the Reps want. I hate the idea of political capital as well. There is nothing to be "spent". He wasn't elected to "spend" political capital. He was to go in there is turn the country around, maybe make Washington a little less corrupt, and in the process get some good legislation passed. That should involve everyone there, both Dems and Reps alike.

Now if you cut out a group of people regardless of the number of votes they have, they will be pissed. They still have to report back to their constituents as well. If you let them in on that process, they should have no problem saying to their constituents, " There maybe some things that you don't agree with, but we are working our hardest to come up with a practical solution to x problem, we are working together for you."

It can't be that hard, we've seen it done in the past. He just has to get the Reps involved and let things happen organically, rather than trying to push for something very specific, or letting someone else like Reid push for him. Layout a framework, and get the best solutions from both parties. I might be idealizing things, but it will work if he can get the ball rolling.


Dude what you are saying makes sense in a civilized poltically run country. We are being run by polling companies and cable news sound bites now. All that beautiful stuff that you just typed is bullshit now.

The REPs just WILL NOT WORK with DEMs. It's not in their interest to do so.
 
Money said:
California is the highest taxed state, followed by New York correct? Why is it in such financial trouble? They don't collect enough? Someone will probably spout back that this is a right wing talking point, and fair enough, but some truth has to lie in it. It seems like no matter how much they collect, its never enough. Not trying to add fuel to the fire, I know alot of you are upset, but come one man we get taxed left, right, up, and down.

Thats the thing about being a donor state isnt it? Have to keep raising taxes to fund the shit states.

What's the easiest way to balance everybody's budget? Stop letting the military rob us blind. Farms too. Why do we subsidize tobacco again?
 
drakesfortune said:
Come on. Nancy Pelosi wrote the house bill. Harry Reid got the MOST left wing bill he could get with 60 democrats on board. Those bills are as left wing as could possibly be passed with only democrats on board. That's compromise?

I didn't realize Rep. Joseph Cao belonged to the Democratic party.
 

Schattenjäger

Gabriel Knight
mckmas8808 said:
So basically you haven't been following the HCR debate have you. There were plenty of compromises.
Compromises? Or last ditch efforts to get an unpopular bill passed ... There's a difference ....

You compromise when you are vulnerable - the dems didn't think they were vulnerable - now for sure they are - let's see some real compromise -

Now that I think about it - I don't think Obama thought he'd have a filibuster proof senate before he was elected - hence all the talk of bipartisanship
 
EARTH TO FUCKWITS

I REPEAT, EARTH TO FUCKWITS

100 Days of "Fair & Balanced"

Obama just wasn't nice enough to them? They then became scorn?

Unfortunately the hair cells that are part of a giant cunt aren't like the auditory sensory receptor ones in the ear. What will it funking take to get it? The Left has largely taken all the disappointing reality of what has happened the past year. The watercooler of HCR has been pissed in over and over again and the liberal triumphs contained in it are about as convincing to thinking people as homeopathy.
Yet still, Weiner and Sanders were gonna take what they could get and vote Yay.
 

Particle Physicist

between a quark and a baryon
Schattenjagger said:
And I don't understand how you all say the dems compromised - There was no intention of compromise from the get-go .... The Louisiana purchase was not compromise


are you joking? the current mess of the healthcare bill is a result of constant compromises. furthermore, the long ass delays in voting for the bill, has been due to constant talks and compromises.
 

Schattenjäger

Gabriel Knight
quadriplegicjon said:
are you joking? the current mess of the healthcare bill is a result of constant compromises. furthermore, the long ass delays in voting for the bill, has been due to constant talks and compromises.
list said compromises
 
quadriplegicjon said:
are you joking? the current mess of the healthcare bill is a result of constant compromises. furthermore, the long ass delays in voting for the bill, has been due to constant talks and compromises.

At the end of the day all the compromises didn't do much to change the bill from what was originally proposed. It's false to say the bill is poor because constant capitulation to blue dogs.
 

joey_z

Banned
LovingSteam said:
What depresses me is that after the Repubs had almost an entire decade to work their magic, people have decided to return to them after only a year. A YEAR! Under Bush's watch, we had 9/11, the worst economic crash since the Great Depression, 2 wars which are still ongoing, Katrina and the horrible response and yet people are still willing to say "HMMM Gimme that!".

The leadership is extremely weak and deserves the pounding it's getting. I always thought the "Obama isn't experienced enough" tactic was pathetic. However, perhaps certain experience in handling realpolitik against the Republican flaming agenda and fighting against democratic complacency is lacking. Too much time was devoted to addressing partisan attacks than in actually pushing through anything.
 

Particle Physicist

between a quark and a baryon
RiskyChris said:
At the end of the day all the compromises didn't do much to change the bill from what was originally proposed. It's false to say the bill is poor because constant capitulation to blue dogs.


I didn't say it was completely poor. there is some good stuff there. there is even some good stuff on there that was initially proposed by republicans. but there have been some major compromises that completely gutted certain aspects of the bill that would have made it much better.
 
GhaleonEB said:
The thing is, it does not matter if we lose the House or not.

The House has passed:

  • Healthcare
  • Energy/cap and trade
  • Education reform
  • Financial regulation reform

The Senate now cannot do any of those things because 41 > 59. So we can keep the House and keep the Senate and continue to have an entirely frozen government. Literally hundreds of Obama's appointees from last year are not yet in place - multiple departments are running on skeleton, temp-laden crews. Obama's entire domestic agenda is now down in flames.

What's going to happen in the next three years will make California look like a well oiled machine. This nation is completely fucked. And we deserve it.

GG, MA.

Weren't you the super-optimist just 48 hours ago? But yeah I agree, it looks like much of the domestic agenda is dead for the next couple of years.

Also, the people here (and elsewhere) squawking about the lack of bi-partisanship from Obama/Dems, this just shows how awful the Dems are at messaging. Obama has made numerous attempts at bipartisanship such as including tax cuts in the Stimulus and courting Olympia Snow and other Senate Republicans on HCR. But everytime Obama extended his hand, Republicans would just slap it away. In the early part of the summer, Republicans said they couldn't support a public option but would be in favor of exchanged or co-ops. Obama and the Senate bill eventually moved toward that direction but still not a single support from a Republican. Then Republicans demanded that the HCR bill not add to the budget, so the Dems managed to come up with a bill that was deficit neutral and STILL not a single Republican support. Now they just say "start over". When Obama and Dems tried compromising with Republicans are certain issues, Republicans just kept moving the goal-posts back. Republicans were not negotiating in good faith.

But somehow the narrative is starting to build that Obama and Dems went on a crazed liberal tangent this past year and the poor little Republicans desperately wanted to help the new president but he simply wouldn't listen them. Puhleeez...

It all started with the stimulus plan when Eric Cantor got the House Republicans to vote unanimously against it. From that point on it was pretty much the game plan of the Republicans to unanimously vote against any domestic bill that could potentially give Obama a "victory" while at the same time deny him the bipartisanship moniker. So far it's worked.

Anybody who has been closely following politics knows Obama and Dems have made much more than just token efforts to reach out to Republicans. But it takes two to tango and the Republicans have successfully denied him any bipartisanship accomplishments, so now it's very easy for the conservative media to proclaim to the uniformed that Obama is a crazed liberal partisan. To accurately refute the claim you have to get down into the weeds of the bills and explain what actually happened but of course that's too much for our short-attention public.
 

Schattenjäger

Gabriel Knight
quadriplegicjon said:
are you serious? i'm not going to recount the past few months for you. but i'll mention one major compromise. dropping the public plan.
If it was true compromise.. there would be no talk of a public plan from the very beginning
 

Godslay

Banned
mckmas8808 said:
Dude what you are saying makes sense in a civilized poltically run country. We are being run by polling companies and cable news sound bites now. All that beautiful stuff that you just typed is bullshit now.

The REPs just WILL NOT WORK with DEMs. It's not in their interest to do so.

Yes it is idealized. But it is in both of their interests to work together. If Obama goes about it in the proper manner, it will happen. I can pretty much see how it is going already. The Dems are already shifting, I can't recall how many quotes I've seen tonight about not moving ahead with HCR, until Brown is in office from Democrats. Obama will follow as well, and out of this he can renew relationships with the Reps because of it. Everything we want might not get done, but as long as he can show a bipartisan body of work in 2012, he should skate to victory. If there is an outreach the Reps will come around.
 

Particle Physicist

between a quark and a baryon
Schattenjagger said:
If it was true compromise.. there would be no talk of a public plan from the very beginning


Huh? That makes no sense whatsoever. First of all. the public plan was a compromise to begin with. The left wing wanted single payer, they compromised with a public plan. They later compromised by dropping the public plan completely. In order to compromise, you have to negotiate things and change your plans, you can't start off by giving the other side whatever they want. it gives you no room to negotiate, or compromise.. :lol

are you seriously joking? it's hard to tell sometimes.

o_O
 

teiresias

Member
Godslay said:
Yes it is idealized. But it is in both of their interests to work together. If Obama goes about it in the proper manner, it will happen. I can pretty much see how it is going already. The Dems are already shifting, I can't recall how many quotes I've seen tonight about not moving ahead with HCR, until Brown is in office from Democrats. Obama will follow as well, and out of this he can renew relationships with the Reps because of it. Everything we want might not get done, but as long as he can show a bipartisan body of work in 2012, he should skate to victory. If there is an outreach the Reps will come around.

The Republicans in the legislature aren't going to vote yes on any domestic policy agenda again until the President has an (R) in front of his name. The damn bill could eliminate taxes in the country completely and they'd still find some reason not to vote for it if it was coming from the dems.
 

Particle Physicist

between a quark and a baryon
Godslay said:
Yes it is idealized. But it is in both of their interests to work together. If Obama goes about it in the proper manner, it will happen. I can pretty much see how it is going already. The Dems are already shifting, I can't recall how many quotes I've seen tonight about not moving ahead with HCR, until Brown is in office from Democrats. Obama will follow as well, and out of this he can renew relationships with the Reps because of it. Everything we want might not get done, but as long as he can show a bipartisan body of work in 2012, he should skate to victory. If there is an outreach the Reps will come around.


I wish. What is really going to happen, is that the Republicans will renew their efforts to kill everything the Democrats attempt. Why should they change, if they have been rewarded for their behavior so far?
 

Averon

Member
Godslay said:
Yes it is idealized. But it is in both of their interests to work together. If Obama goes about it in the proper manner, it will happen. I can pretty much see how it is going already. The Dems are already shifting, I can't recall how many quotes I've seen tonight about not moving ahead with HCR, until Brown is in office from Democrats. Obama will follow as well, and out of this he can renew relationships with the Reps because of it. Everything we want might not get done, but as long as he can show a bipartisan body of work in 2012, he should skate to victory. If there is an outreach the Reps will come around.

:lol


You're just trolling now
 
Schattenjagger said:
list said compromises

To name a few:

-Not tying the public option to Medicare rates
-Dropping the public option altogether
-Dropping the proposed Medicare buy-in
-Stupak/Nelson amendments restricting abortion coverage
-Dropping Dorgan's drug reimportation amendment

You're deluded.

Averon said:
:lol


You're just trolling now

Well, to be fair, it seems more likely that he's just ignorant and really does believe that Republicans would start negotiating in good faith if Dems capitulated even more to their demands.
 

Godslay

Banned
Averon said:
:lol


You're just trolling now

I wish it was that easy! I'm honestly saying that is could be a great time to reset. A good leader identifies what is working and not working given his situation and environment, and adapts to that environment. He doesn't have to become Obamacan, his Rep alter-ego, but he can adjust to what is going on and work in the contexts of that, and accomplish things. Is that too much to ask? Or I am trolling again?
 
Godslay said:
I wish it was that easy! I'm honestly saying that is could be a great time to reset. A good leader identifies what is working and not working given his situation and environment, and adapts to that environment. He doesn't have to become Obamacan, his Rep alter-ego, but he can adjust to what is going on and work in the contexts of that, and accomplish things. Is that too much to ask? Or I am trolling again?

Your last post ended with "the reps will come around."

That has not and will not happen.
 

Godslay

Banned
Father_Brain said:
Well, to be fair, it seems more likely that he's just ignorant and really does believe that Republicans would start negotiating in good faith if Dems capitulated even more to their demands.

It's not about demands, it's about having a hand in the government. Of course they aren't going to negotiate, when they haven't been given a place at the table. Maybe I'm ignorant, but what we have going on right now isn't working, and it is both parties fault. It has to change somehow, and I simply think that this could be a time to do it without suffering further down the line.
 

Schattenjäger

Gabriel Knight
quadriplegicjon said:
Huh? That makes no sense whatsoever. First of all. the public plan was a compromise to begin with. The left wing wanted single payer, they compromised with a public plan. They later compromised by dropping the public plan completely. In order to compromise, you have to negotiate things and change your plans, you can't start off by giving the other side whatever they want. it gives you no room to negotiate, or compromise.. :lol

are you seriously joking? it's hard to tell sometimes.

o_O
the gop and dems have two completely different ideals when it comes to hcr..i also add that the gop feels it is not as immediate an issue as the dems

before the election.. obama, not knowing they would have a filibuster-proof senate, was commited to bipartisanship.. meaning coming to some real middle of the road solution... a compromise between the two ideals, a very diluted version of the current bills combined with some gop additions.. maybe tort reform..perhaps...

election is over... dems win a filibuster proof senate...

hmmm... compromise?? no need to compromise now..

instead... we will pass a more progressive bill and for whatever hold outs are left we will make changes (as you say compromises)..
 
I remember, there was a time, after the 08 election, when I longed for this thread to return to the traffic of the election, felt it had gotten too slow.

WTF was I thinking?
 

ToxicAdam

Member
LovingSteam said:
What depresses me is that after the Repubs had almost an entire decade to work their magic, people have decided to return to them after only a year. A YEAR! Under Bush's watch, we had 9/11, the worst economic crash since the Great Depression, 2 wars which are still ongoing, Katrina and the horrible response and yet people are still willing to say "HMMM Gimme that!".


This is just one state in America. They don't speak for America. Brown ran a better campaign in a state that is 50 percent independent. Brown was the beneficiary of running in a special election that was being viewed by the entire country. For the common voter, this was a perfect time to "send a message". Not to Obama, not to Democrats. But to all the lazy politicians that take their vote for granted. Both nationally and to the local "machine" that churns out uninspired, safe candidates and just expects the votes to roll in. When the going gets rough, you just churn out the same old polarized playbook to remind the voter of who the "other guy" is (and boy, is he EVIL) and then you coast to a 10 point win.

Not this time.


So Democrats (and incumbents) are going to have to be smart. Just simply using the same playbook (trying to pin a candidate to Bush is one) is not going to work in this political climate. You better be focused on jobs, you better campaign hard and you better not get too negative. Or even a "sure thing" can be lost to a relative nobody.


platypotamus said:
I remember, there was a time, after the 08 election, when I longed for this thread to return to the traffic of the election, felt it had gotten too slow.

WTF was I thinking?


It's only been about 1000 posts in the past 24 hours. :D
 

Godslay

Banned
RiskyChris said:
As someone with a functioning brain I feel confident in my prediction.

What are you implying? I can easily do the same thing, and say that it is a no-brainer that reps will come around if the dems work with them.
 
Godslay said:
It's not about demands, it's about having a hand in the government. Of course they aren't going to negotiate, when they haven't been given a place at the table.

You really are proving your ignorance. There's Max Baucus' bipartisan "Gang of Six," which delayed HCR for months in a futile attempt to get at least one GOP vote from Snowe, Enzi, and Grassley. And early last year, Obama engaged in a massive charm offensive to try to win GOP votes for the stimulus package. It ended up passing along partisan lines. It ended up winning no republican votes in the House, and was watered down heavily to get Snowe, Specter, and Collins to support it.
 

Akainu

Member
Godslay said:
It's not about demands, it's about having a hand in the government. Of course they aren't going to negotiate, when they haven't been given a place at the table. Maybe I'm ignorant, but what we have going on right now isn't working, and it is both parties fault. It has to change somehow, and I simply think that this could be a time to do it without suffering further down the line.
After reading a few of your post ignorant is too nice of a word.
 
Also to continue off my last post about poor messaging, the Dems SUCK at naming their bills!

The Republicans are smart enough to name their bills like "The Patriot Act". However if the Democrats were in power they would have named it the "Domestic Seizure and Surveillance Act".

The WH realized their mistake the "Stimulus" bill and tried to rename it to the "American Recovery and Reinvestment Act" but by then it was too late, the original nickname already stuck. It should have been named the "Economic Recovery Act" from the very start or better yet name it "The Great Depression Prevention Act". I constant reminder of how bad things were and how much worse it could have been.

As for the healthcare bill, I would name it the "Affordable Healthcare Act". I would like to see Republicans say out loud that they're against "affordable healthcare". :lol These little messaging and sales tricks make a big difference in public perception.
 

Doc Holliday

SPOILER: Columbus finds America
I feel like i'm in the Twilight Zone...

Obama has been president for 8 years and the republicans are our last hope.


Reminds me when people voted for G.W after the prosperous years under a Democrat.
 
Godslay said:
What are you implying? I can easily do the same thing, and say that it is a no-brainer that reps will come around if the dems work with them.

I'm implying that there is overwhelming evidence that republicans have zero interest in governing let alone helping other people govern, therefore anyone should reasonably come to the conclusion that they will not play ball.
 

Godslay

Banned
Father_Brain said:
You really are proving your ignorance. There's Max Baucus' bipartisan "Gang of Six," which delayed HCR for months in a futile attempt to get at least one GOP vote from Snowe, Enzi, and Grassley. And early last year, Obama engaged in a massive charm offensive to try to win GOP votes for the stimulus package. It ended up passing along partisan lines. It ended up winning no republican votes in the House, and was watered down heavily to get Snowe, Specter, and Collins to support it.

First of all, not everyone believes in opening up the coffers. Your going to run into opposition regardless, when you open up the piggy bank. Secondly, your proving my point, because Specter (R at the time), Collins (R), and Snowe voted for ARRA. Watering the bill down may have happened, but some Reps came aboard. Like I've said in previous posts, they will come around if you allow them to work with you. Plus even though I think it is hugely beneficial, the bill has proven largely unpopular, so maybe it was a little foresight to not want the stink of the bill on their hands.

Furthermore on your gang of 6 I'll give you a quote from your very own article proving what I am saying: "Mr. Enzi, who sits on both the Finance Committee and the health committee, has a long record on health issues but found Democrats on the health panel unwilling to compromise." It's pretty easy to jump ship when your not rowing.
 

GhaleonEB

Member
The Chosen One said:
Weren't you the super-optimist just 48 hours ago?
Before the election? Yup. After, I'm oddly calm about the whole thing. We're fucked, there's not much you can do about it in the near term. Such is life.
 

cntr

Banned
now for something else entirely

New Orleans cops use ancient "unnatural copulation" law to turn prostitutes into sex-offenders

New Orleans cops are busting hookers under a nineteenth century felony law against "unnatural copulation" (NOLA PD says that oral or anal sex count), which means that they have to register as sex offenders. And life as a sex offender is terrible:


Of the 861 sex offenders currently registered in New Orleans, 483 were convicted of a crime against nature, according to Doug Cain, a spokesperson with the Louisiana State Police. And of those convicted of a crime against nature, 78 percent are Black and almost all are women.

The law impacts sex workers in both small and large ways.

Tabitha has to register an address in the sex offender database, and because she doesn't have a permanent home, she has registered the address of a nonprofit organization that is helping her. She also has to purchase and mail postcards with her picture to everyone in the neighborhood informing them of her conviction. If she needs to evacuate to a shelter during a hurricane, she must evacuate to a special shelter for sex offenders, and this shelter has no separate safe spaces for women. She is even prohibited from very ordinary activities in New Orleans like wearing a costume at Mardi Gras.

Her Crime? Sex Work in New Orleans
(via JWZ)
 

devilhawk

Member
Doc Holliday said:
Can democrats ask for a recount Minnesota style? :lol
Not with a ~100k difference

Edit: Why did many of the Western Massachusetts counties vote Democrat? Obviously Amherst and Springfield are more urban, but what about the most western and northern counties?
 

mAcOdIn

Member
People claiming this is the downfall of America I think are going overboard, way overboard, I mean, if that's so how can we fall because all we're doing is not changing, that's not falling, that's just stagnating.

I do think Obama was a bit disingenuous, at least in public, about his bipartisan efforts, however, I do also think that it's pretty clear that the current Republican party is much more interested in hurting the Democrats politically then actually governing the country. Sorry. I don't think there was a chance in hell that Obama was actually going to get Republicans to work on anything.

Regarding the health care issue, it failing now is actually my best case scenario, because, as I said a while back, now we'll have to revisit this topic that much sooner and when we do there'll be that much more public support and possible willingness for more meaningful reform. I think passing the current Senate bill would have helped slow the health care problem to the point where we never would have really reformed the system just tweaked it ever so slightly ad naseum. So I hope it dies for now, until it's either affecting enough of the population where we can do real reform or we get an actual leader who can actually lead instead one that looks for the safest way to be led.

I also wanted to touch on the concept of allowing people to not perform abortions or prescribe the morning after pill to rape victims as being equal to a de facto ban on abortion. Morally and ethically I do think there is a clear difference. We're not talking about Christian Scientists here, they're against one procedure, I'm sure a pharmacist or doctor who performs abortions didn't start out thinking "gee I'd like to kill some babies" nor do I think it's the same thing as not wanting to treat a black person, although I'm sure it'd be the same rationalization process in the brain, so I really do think it should be a persons choice to do that one service.

That said, I also agree that in certain areas granting people the ability to make that decision would in fact be a back door way of banning abortions. Troubling, but sometimes allowing people to have the rights they should does have consequences, I hate that sometimes. So both sides are right, and wrong. Morally they should have the choice, but economically in practice giving that choice will have the consequence of some places not doing them.

Anyways though, the solution is easy enough, mandate that hospitals have at least one person at all times willing to do those procedures and you're set, you're wasting money but moral dilemma solved. Just like I believe in assisted suicide for terminal patients but I don't expect every Doctor to go for that nor would I expect them to all be required to do that. But really, fuck pharmacists anyways, it should be grandfathered in that all new pharmacists don't get the luxury of deciding what is and isn't morally acceptable from now on, I don't hate them, but I don't really understand or believe that anyone has a calling to be a pharmacist, I'm pretty sure it's just money, and there's lots of medical jobs that anyone can do that make decent money, move aside from now on and take some other job that doesn't clash with your conscious. But being that the pill is a relatively new thing in this country I think the current pharmacists should get a say in what they do, but from here on out it should be understood for all future hires that, yes, you may have to fill this prescription. Hospitals would just start asking if they're opposed to abortion related services and not hire people that are in the future since hiring a person just to handle that one task is a waste.
 
Not in the mood to let bullshit slide.

This is 5 months ago.

There's four committees that have already passed out versions of health care, three in the House, one in the Senate.

If you add all those committees together, they accepted, the Democrats who run the committees, 183 Republican amendments in those four committees, 183. Despite taking all those 183 amendments, you know how many Republican votes they got? Zero
http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/node/30594

8 weeks of additional lolly-gagging and we get 1 irrelevant vote from Olympia "My vote today is my vote today. It doesn't forecast what my vote will be tomorrow." Snowe.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom